The heat is on as Democrat Senate Majority Leader ′Dirty Harry′ Reid is being called out as a liar for his recent accusations about Mitt Romney not paying taxes. On the Sunday shows this weekend, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called Reid a ″dirty liar.″ Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told CNN that ″I think he′s lying about his statement, of knowing about Romney.″ Reid has made several statements, including some on the floor of the U.S. Senate, accusing Mitt Romney of not paying taxes during a ten-year period. Surrogates for Barack Obama, including his campaign chairman, David Axelrod, are backing Reid demanding that Romney release at least ten years worth of tax information. Oddly enough, Harry Reid himself has not released any of his tax returns.
Reid claims that he spoke with an investor in Bain Capital and this is where he heard that Romney did not pay any taxes during some of those ten years. This seems highly unlikely. How many people who own stocks or mutual funds know about the tax returns filed by the CEOs of those companies? ZERO! This is the most ridiculous and scurrilous line of attack taken yet by the Democrats against Mitt Romney.
Perhaps Harry Reid is suffering from head injuries from his old boxing days? For over 1,100 days, the U.S. Senate under his control has yet to put together a federal budget. Hardly any legislation is even voted on. Reid and Senate Democrats are playing the role of obstructionists with dire consequences. Even Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner got upset with Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) when she began talking about deliberately driving the nation of the fiscal cliff.
Not only is Dirty Harry Reid probably a liar on his allegations about Mitt Romney not paying taxes, but the Senate Majority Leader may be violating Senate ethics rules. Reid is pushing for a deal to get a Chinese company involved with ENN Mojave Energy LLC on a ′green energy′ solar power plant in Nevada. ENN has as a lobbyist the law firm Lionel, Sawyer and Collins, where the senator′s son, Rory Reid, works as a lawyer/lobbyist for ENN. This despite a 2003 ban on Senate family members working as lobbyists. So come clean, Dirty Harry Reid! How about releasing some of your tax returns? How about explaining what your son is doing and how much federal money is involved with ENN? Mitt Romney has complied with the law in releasing his financial statements. What about YOU?
August 6th, 2012 at 6:55 am
Ethics rules? Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters are good examples of how little ethics rules mean. Dingey Harry made these statements from the floor of the senate purposely so he couldn’t be sued for libel.
Harry Reid’s behavior though provides a valuable tip for future boxers. Never lead wih your face.
August 6th, 2012 at 7:36 am
“Probably” a liar? You just gave yourself away.
The fact that Mitt will not release his tax returns is a huge problem for the GOP. What is he hiding?
August 6th, 2012 at 7:41 am
I don’t care about his tax returns, if he has a good accountant, like most successful entrepreneurs, he should have paid no taxes.
Heck, leave it alone. Next thing you know they will want to see his birth certificate, which is ridiculous, even if his father was born in Mexico.
August 6th, 2012 at 8:50 am
All Pres. candidates has released they tax returns. Ten years of them or so. Why Mitt different?
If he wants people to shut up about it, then release his long form birth certificate!
Oh I sorry, I meant to say, tax returns.
August 6th, 2012 at 10:25 am
No Gok..
most candidates only release 2-3 years of tax documents.
Buzz is right,and Reids an idiot.
Hes a professional businessman, religiously inclined, more than likely made legal contributions as write offs while cutting a check to Uncle Sam.
I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts Mitt has generated tons of revenues for the IRS over the span of his career
Birthers and truthers are not worth the energy.
But Harry should not be left alone.
This culture within our Government of “say anything” has to start having consequences as Monkey mentioned.
“Basically” is the one word that keeps Harry from being complete scum.
Most Americans “basically” pay no taxes
August 6th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
Reid is an idiot, but if Republicans were smarter he would have beaten in the last election.
August 6th, 2012 at 1:32 pm
Patrick, while your intense hatred for Reid is obvious (ditto for anyone that doesn’t march lockstep or kowtow to your mindset as well), don’t let that deep seated bigotry blind you from rational thinking by saying he’s an idiot. His Romney accusations, like him or not, true or not, was brilliant and a politically advantageous move. It kept the issue front and center while putting even more pressure on Romney to come clean (looks like those Dems learned a thing or two from the birther thing). Also, he’s not running for office this time so there’s no political fallout fr him.
As for the “if he were smarter/beaten in the last election” thing, I guess folks there weren’t to impressed with a “chicken for checkups” government. So in the battle of wits, it looks like your candidate came up short. You remind me of a freind from my younger years who was playing pinball and wasn’t having a very good game. He was complaining “this machine is stupid”. I looked at him and said, “it’s beating you”.
August 6th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Reid backed down the mob. And lived, too.
August 7th, 2012 at 5:44 am
GOK,
I said that Reid is “probably a liar” because maybe some person did tell him that Romney might not have paid any taxes. That does not mean it is true, just that Reid might be telling the truth that somebody told him.
As I mentioned above in the post, no “investor” would have access to a CEO’s personal tax records. That alone makes this whole story a fabrication at some point in the rumor-chain.
August 7th, 2012 at 5:48 am
Ronald,
Most of the polling data shows that Romney’s taxes and his wealth are not issues that are resonating with voters. So I would not say this is politically advantageous. Oh, granted it gives the Democrat allies in the Media something to talk about on a daily basis, but the power of the Liberal Media is declining as Americans, REAL AMERICANS, no longer trust the Media.
August 7th, 2012 at 5:53 am
GOK,
As Micky points out, most presidential candidates only release 2 years worth of tax returns to the public. Romney has already released one year, 2010, and will release 2011 after he files (he got an extension back in April). Romney has also released some 500 pages of his financial records. So he has already has or is committed to doing what is normal.
I’d bet a dollar to the hole in your doughnut that if Romney did release 10-12 years worth of tax returns, the same Democrats and Media allies would be screaming for 20 years worth of records.
August 7th, 2012 at 6:41 am
“…but the power of the Liberal Media is declining as Americans, REAL AMERICANS, no longer trust the Media.”
And there it is…only people that hold extreme right wing views are the “REAL” Americans, right?
I see these inferences all of the time on this site. Oh well, it fits with Michele Bachmann’s quest to identify who the real Americans in Congress are.
Oh well, I guess if something is repeated over and over it is accepted as truth.
Sort of like Kerry and Bush. Kerry was branded a coward, even though he served in a “real” military conflict, when running against a candidate that occasionally kept the skies over Dallas safe from attack.
You see, because of his political stance, only Bush could be considered a “real” American.
So what is the definition of a “real” American?
August 7th, 2012 at 7:34 am
Andy, while Romney’s wealth may not be an issue, the fact that he’s not releasing those returns are. I don’t know which polls you’re referring to or what wording was used but even prominent conservative figures are concerned of the fallout. In a world of non-delusion, anyone of reasonable intellect understands a simple equation here. Romney is hurting his campaign by not releasing. So, simple logic dictates that releasing them would do more damage than not, otherwise, we’d be seeing them.
Priebus’s “dirty liar” comment, by the way, was a smart move as it pulls the argument away from the tax return issues, giving the media fodder to focus on “FIGHT!FIGHT!!FIGHT!!!!”. And indeed they have. Priebus doesn’t even focus or responds to the allegations them self but goes in a different direction of attacking Reid. Now he’s saying he’ll “triple down” on his “dirty liar” claim. Of course he will.
Your definition of “real Americans” is telling in one aspect yet vague in another. I take it you’re joining in on the mantra of the crazies screaming anyone that isn’t Republican, isn’t American? On a previous thread, one the moderators chose to exclude me from, you made an explicit indication that Obama wasn’t a real man. I’d like to know, exactly what species do you feel that he is? And if Democrats, Independents, and Moderates aren’t “real Americans”, what precisely are they?
You see, when you veer away from the real politics of the argument and let your festered hatred over ride the issues we should be discussing, you only expose your true bigotry. Just a friendly tip.
August 7th, 2012 at 8:14 am
So what is the definition of a “real” American?
A white, heterosexual, Christian, Republican male.
August 7th, 2012 at 9:42 am
GOK:
“…but the power of the Liberal Media is declining as Americans, REAL AMERICANS, no longer trust the Media.”
And there it is…only people that hold extreme right wing views are the “REAL” Americans, right?
I see these inferences all of the time on this site. Oh well, it fits with Michele Bachmann’s quest to identify who the real Americans in Congress are.”
Aww shut up.
All you do is bash FOX and no other outlet.
Do the dodo
August 7th, 2012 at 9:43 am
Pardon..
“Do the “MATH” dodo
August 7th, 2012 at 9:54 am
“Andy, while Romney’s wealth may not be an issue, the fact that he’s not releasing those returns are.”
In the country I was raised the burden of proof is on the accuser.
Harry said “the word is out ”
So, some schmuck is running around telling everyone Mitt hasnt paid taxes in ten years.
Common sense, in any sense, has taken serious dive in this country if anyone pays one more minute of attention to this idiocy.
Anyone who thinks Mitt as a governor hasnt revealed his taxes before, or hasnt paid any in ten years is a complete idiot.
They wont let the measely 1300 I owed them slip so what makes anyone think the IRS will let millions slip ?
Besides, wtf is Harry doin as the majority leader spreading this sht ?
Its not in his jobs narrative.
Why dont you pass a budget for the country and not worry so much about your threats budget.
Bring your source, prove your point, and as Bill said, take it to the courts and lock him up hes evading taxes.
Til then, please, stfu
August 7th, 2012 at 10:41 am
Micky, I really don’t know by what stretch you feel that you’re authorized to tell me or any contributor to stfu. This is more true considering your admission and demonstration that you’re not up to speed with other contributors. Considering that you’ve admitted your responses to me would be of a condescending tone, I really have no interest in wasting my time trying to communicate with you on an adult level or any level. Accordingly, you’re absence of kibitzing my comments would be much appreciated. And in the event that you can’t resist stalking me, I see no need in humoring your future trolling with a response.
August 7th, 2012 at 10:52 am
Truth is, I don’t like Romney. His main plus is that he is not Obama. If there’s time to bring a better candidate, this might well be the chance.
August 7th, 2012 at 10:57 am
“Micky, I really don’t know by what stretch you feel that you’re authorized to tell me or any contributor to stfu.”
Simply a suggestion. I have no power 3000 miles out in the middle of the Pacific.
” This is more true considering your admission and demonstration that you’re not up to speed with other contributors.”
Right, which is why you still wont/cant answer my questions.
” Considering that you’ve admitted your responses to me would be of a condescending tone, I really have no interest in wasting my time trying to communicate with you on an adult level or any level.”
You’re joking right ?
You’re the most off topic obfuscating towards personal attack troll I’ve ever met.
“Accordingly, you’re absence of kibitzing my comments would be much appreciated. And in the event that you can’t resist stalking me, I see no need in humoring your future trolling with a response.”
Good.
I’ll still point out out your idiocy, hypocrisy and ideological bigotry every chance I get.
The less you speak the better.
If you, or anyone of any ideology doesnt agree that our voting system is too manipulative to campaign interests then its you and them who are not “not up to speed with other contributors.”
August 7th, 2012 at 11:14 am
@ Ron
You see Ron, I lost my right to vote 30 years ago by commiting the crime of possesing a joint that some rogue cop tried to say I was selling instead right in front of my own office.
I was looking at 2 years in a Ca. prison so I left Ca., returned 1/2 a year before the statute of limitations had expired.
During a traffic stop the officer discovered my failure to appear on a felony.
Next day I was in court. With no witnesses or anyone to corraborate the charges I could not escape the fact that I failed to appear on a felony, which in itself is a felony.
I spent 3 months in San Ysidro correctional for one joint.
My life was destroyed on top of never being able to contribute to the electoral process while harming no one at all, ever.
So… this crap both parties pull on our electorate every 2-4 years really pi$$es me off while uninformed and bribed and illegal shmucks still get to vote.
You can betcher ass it hits a nerve when its Republicans who actually wont rid us of a law designed to disenfranchise slaves from voting some 160 years ago.
They’re actually screwing themselves out a potentially huge voting block that would more likely vote Democrat
August 7th, 2012 at 11:15 am
Yeah well, that whole rant would do better on the Harry thread.
August 7th, 2012 at 11:17 am
No, the Ohio thread. Sorry, I’m multitasking Tibetan Spaniels
August 8th, 2012 at 5:48 am
A “REAL AMERICAN”, by my definition, is one who supports the original intent of our Constitution. Who believes that Capitalism is a liberating force. Who knows that we are better off with less government interference in our lives.
August 8th, 2012 at 6:40 am
“A “REAL AMERICAN”, by my definition, is one who supports the original intent of our Constitution. Who believes that Capitalism is a liberating force. Who knows that we are better off with less government interference in our lives.”
Capitalism promotes slavery and idiots who could never understand the Constitutions intent
August 8th, 2012 at 12:36 pm
At least your definition is consistent with your usual bigoted and partisan mindset. It’s vague yet gives you the opportunity to be your usual hypocritical self, cherry picking at will regardless of rational thinking.
By your logic, the Constitution, in its original intent, would be a cut and dry document with no interpretation. By that thinking, we wouldn’t even need a SCOTUS as every vote would have a straight 9-0 outcome. Yet you yourself have denounced majority votes that don’t suit your agenda. One can only deduce that your definition of a real American is one that agrees with you.
The belief that Capitalism is a liberating force is equally vague. To what extent? Consider private property (something many “real Americans” have as that’s part of the “real American” dream). Private property is central to both liberty and capitalism so if we look back at Kelo v. City of New London, do we exclude one party from the “real American” status? Are property owners or smaller business not real Americans as they’re unwilling to concede to being a tenet of a monopoly state? And if they do this, does that not take away their very freedoms? Your definition slams the door to any rationale and falsely gives some fabricated credence to whatever binary conclusions you chose to make.
And to what extent do we, or should we (in order to be real Americans)want less government interference in our lives? How much less? The radical right promotes abolishing the EPA, OSHA, Dept of Ed, etc but they can’t intelligently discuss the ramifications. Do we end all taxes? Make our own roads? Wouldn’t we eventually (assuming we’re looking at continual improvement)eliminate all government offices? You conveniently leave your definition open for you alone to decide at whim who’s American and who isn’t. At the end of the day, you cowardly make an admission that real Americans are people that you like or that think like you.
Yes, it’s consistent and expected for you to support your debunked non sequitur rants with incoherent gibberish. They can’t stand up to scrutiny on their own merits as they’re solely a product of your hatred of people that don’t share your views. You endorse a dangerous concept that the GOP should not work with Dems but rather, they should destroy them as, by your throw-a-rock-and-run definition, are not real Americans.
And as always, you run for cover from your accusations that President Obama isn’t a real man. Again, if you say he isn’t a man, what exactly is he?
August 8th, 2012 at 1:30 pm
“At least your definition is consistent with your usual bigoted and partisan mindset. It’s vague yet gives you the opportunity to be your usual hypocritical self, cherry picking at will regardless of rational thinking.”
Example please ?
You dont have one because you have is yanked out of your ass.
Aloha
August 8th, 2012 at 1:42 pm
“By your logic, the Constitution, in its original intent, would be a cut and dry document with no interpretation. By that thinking, we wouldn’t even need a SCOTUS as every vote would have a straight 9-0 outcome. Yet you yourself have denounced majority votes that don’t suit your agenda. One can only deduce that your definition of a real American is one that agrees with you.”
Yeah, I just hate activist judges, dont you ?
Its “application” ass hole, not “interpretation” as in mandatory purchases of services or products. Other than liability insurance for drivers and public products/services there is no way in hell you can make buy health insurance at all, or from anyone specific.
Roberts decision was pure genius as he put the decision to the people.
Wise up ass hole.
All of your posts to anyone not a leftist are soaked in personal attacks and little fact or relevance.
You dont see me talking to anyone else here like I do you except for GOK.
Snow, Buzz, and I differ on many issues but at the end of the day treat each other like humans.
If I had the power your poisonous ass would be sht canned
August 8th, 2012 at 1:42 pm
“By your logic, the Constitution, in its original intent, would be a cut and dry document with no interpretation. By that thinking, we wouldn’t even need a SCOTUS as every vote would have a straight 9-0 outcome. Yet you yourself have denounced majority votes that don’t suit your agenda. One can only deduce that your definition of a real American is one that agrees with you.”
Yeah, I just hate activist judges, dont you ?
Its “application” ass hole, not “interpretation” as in mandatory purchases of services or products. Other than liability insurance for drivers and public products/services there is no way in hell you can make buy health insurance at all, or from anyone specific.
Roberts decision was pure genius as he put the decision to the people.
Wise up ass hole.
All of your posts to anyone not a leftist are soaked in personal attacks and little fact or relevance.
You dont see me talking to anyone else here like I do you except for GOK.
Snow, Buzz, and I differ on many issues but at the end of the day treat each other like humans.
If I had the power your poisonous ass would be sht canned
August 8th, 2012 at 2:04 pm
“The belief that Capitalism is a liberating force is equally vague. To what extent? ”
This was written years ago from myself to a gentleman who asked me the same question, and many here since. Stock answer for idiots like you
Not that you deserve any enlightenment.
Moving on to your wild assertion that there are different “styles” or “varieties” of capitalism, be it lunatic-fringe style, or moderate style: this is an absurd and demonstrably false notion. Capitalism, by its very definition, means free trade. That is all. That’s what capitalism is. It means that government stays out of commerce and industry, just as government stays out of religion, and for the exact same reasons. There is no middle ground to that: it’s either capitalistic, or its opposite: interventionist.
Which means mercantilist.
Which means protectionist.
“Capitalism is the economic manifestation of freedom” (Fredrick Bastiat).
“Capitalism is individual rights applied to the science of production and exchange” (George Reisman).
Capitalism, by definition, is “a network of free voluntary exchanges in which producers work, produce, and exchange their products for the products of others through prices voluntarily arrived at” (Capitalism Versus Statism, Murray N. Rothbard).
The crux of capitalism, and thus freedom, is private property.
The only alternative to private property is communal ownership or governmental ownership, which is precisely what environmentalism advocates.
Communal ownership and government ownership are also called socialism. That, by definition, is what socialism is.
As a political philosophy, environmentalism is in every significant way indistinguishable from socialism. Indeed, as many commentators have noted, such as Patrick Moore, one of the cofounders of Green Peace, “environmentalism is repackaged Marxism.”
Socialism, as you presumably know, at least implicitly, is the opposite of capitalism.
Thus, if there is government intervention, it is, to that extent, not capitalism.
This countrys foundation sits on private ownership of private property. Not until our original settlers had private ownership of land, they starved.
August 9th, 2012 at 4:59 am
The “Original Intent” of the U.S. Constitution was to limit the power of the federal government. The Constitution only gives Congress, for example, 17 specific powers. The Executive and Judicial branches have even less.
Capitalism is all about choices and options. Something you, Ronald, and your Moonbat Liberal-Progressive-Marxists are opposed to. You want everyone to be restricted and shackled. You want government to control the marketplace, setting prices and availability. That simply does not work.
August 9th, 2012 at 5:02 am
Right on, Micky! If Ronald and his pals had their way, there would be no such thing as private property. Including the most important property one can own, yourself. They, the Moonbats, would have you believe that you belong to The State or to The Mob. That you must submit to their tyranny as you are their property.
August 9th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Andy, you impute opinions of me that I do not have or you could not possibly know I have as I’ve never written or indicated. Your straw man arguments, talking points, and obvious prejudice are exposed for what they are so you manufacture your own sophomoric arguments out of thin air and once again, claim victory. You even invoke your kibitzing resident troll Micky as if that gives credence to your artless spin.
To be honest, and I’m not sure why, I somewhat expected a bit more of a challenging debate from RightPundits.com, perhaps simply from the name itself. Unfortunately, your (and the other cloned writers that share the same blind mindset) ineptitude of reasonable debate, gross dishonesty on every front, and sheer unadulterated bigotry, forbids any constructive discussions.
August 10th, 2012 at 6:24 am
Well, Ronald, if that really is your name, we here at RightPundits would enjoy a good debate. Unfortunately, you do not have the intellectual capacity to muster such.
I realize that you and the rest of the Liberals are handicapped trying to defend the undefendable. I have yet to hear one rational reason why Obama and the Democrats have failed to produce a federal budget in the last 1100+ days. Presidents only have about three or four primary jobs to perform and that is one of them. The others are to defend the nation, its citizens and property from enemies, foreign or domestic, which Obama shows great reluctance to do so with his new policy on illegal immigrants, and, of course, to sell US Treasury bonds. Obama is only aided in this last thanks to Ben Bernanke using Federal Reserve fiat money to fund our debt load.
Furthermore, it is difficult to take you very seriously about anything when you toss around words like ‘bigotry’ as if you were a clown at a parade throwing candy to children. Again, I realize that you Liberals are trained to wave that flag whenever possible, but that only makes you more of a classic caricature of a Marxist Socialist nimcompoop.
August 10th, 2012 at 9:27 am
Andy, you are a vile example of extreme dishonesty and abject bigotry in every form. You tell me you enjoy good debate but every thread proves you wrong. You’ve been exposed time and time again for your lies yet you double down on those very lies.
And you even lie when you say that you are not prejudiced as you expose your hatred of liberals at every opportunity. You even bashed them in general in the very sentence you denied your bigotry in. And that blatant prejudice, hatred, and disgust of not policies but rather Liberals or non far right people, is the very theme of RightPundits. You even prove it in your very definition of a “real American” and your referencing to Obama as not of the human species.
And you have the audacity to somehow claim a willingness to debate with any good faith, open mind, unbiassedly, or in a partisan manner in areas you may not agree with with people that you’ve already dubbed “not real Americans”. And I assume you want to be taken seriously?
August 10th, 2012 at 11:56 am
Bullsht Ronald.
Andy is simply asking you to answer a few of the same questions I’ve already asked you repeatedly.
Most adults realize that everyone has their idea of the ideal/real American. We also realize these variations come with a certain demographics preference.
The key word is “real”.
Reality in many ways is a concept that differs.
Get over it.
You’re a Real American in many ways to many people while I may be the pi$$ of the earth to you.
If it werent this way…
…none of us would be Americans.
When I say STFU its of a suggestive nature and in no way intended to prohibit anyone’s 1st amendment but rather a dismissal of an others opinion, or statement.
I lied.
If you were participating at my blog and I did have the power to ban you for the poison I think you are, I wouldn’t.
Free speech is an ultimate necessity in this country, not just a right.
Simply because of the fact that if it were not for free speech, we’d never be able to see the ass holes coming.
Start backin your sht up with facts instead of insulting the intel behind the disagreeable.
Many times you are trafficking in wild speculation and innuendo.
Therefore, I cant take your allegations seriously half the time.
Most of us try to improve upon our personas on a daily basis so we can be congenial, productive and feel better about ourselves. I fail often.
Some people believe they’re complete and perfect requiring no amends or alterations.
Which of the two are you ? And if not the latter do you even try ?
Mitt is not some “Bernie Madoff” and any rational adult knows this.
The only people who want to see his tax returns are people who hate his guts anyway. Therefore, he has nothing to gain and should not appease people who despise him.
He succeeded in life and perhaps they did not. That is there fault, not his.
He is not legally required to release anything. He did release 2010 and will soon be releasing 2011. If you think he should go back 10 years, sorry to disappoint you…but in this case you cant honestly matter.
Because, you simply hate the guy. Get over it.
August 10th, 2012 at 12:55 pm
What is a “real” American?
Anyone legally residing here.
There are no qualifiers.
An “ideal” American is something else entirely.
I am sure my opinion on what “ideal” means is much looser then most.
August 10th, 2012 at 2:37 pm
“Anyone legally residing here.”
You might want to think about that.
Some of this countrys worst enemies reside here “legally” and we find out the hard way.
August 10th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
This is why it’s hard for some to swallow the fact that anchor babies, like it or not, are real Americans.
August 10th, 2012 at 4:33 pm
To a liberal, real Americans are those who hate the country or otherwise suck just like they do. Basically, lazy asses living off the government dole, socialists, thugs like Trayvon, and Guantanamo prisoners.
August 10th, 2012 at 5:07 pm
“This is why it’s hard for some to swallow the fact that anchor babies, like it or not, are real Americans.”
You said it: “Anchor babies”
Thats an interesting statement coming from someone who subscribes to a politically correct ideology
Its often the right blamed for using this euphemism in a derogatory manner.
No one has argued the citizenship of the babies born on our soil from any country.
This law is old and constitutionally solid and they’re idiots if they argue this.
Whats at question is the parent(s) who use the baby as a means to abuse entitlements for “real Americans”
I have no problem with those parents or those individuals who’ve been patriotic enough by by paying taxes.
Liberals I’m sure agree with this for their humanitarian reasons as well as do I.
The common logic should be that at this point (with the immigration/border system as fcked up as it has been for decades) its far less expensive just to keep them here and also advantageous to the IRS.
The problem I have is the injustice to those Americans who may want supplemental income no matter how much a blow it is to their pride.
With unemployment the way its going this is a bad time to be offering legal settlement with employment or educational stipulations to those 6 million Barry is addressing.
Part of our immigration policies are based on the system being able to absorb them according to labor statistics.
I used to pick pineapple every summer as a teen.
My son or I would have no problem picking produce if we needed to. This option should be for those who came or were born here legally.
But get ready to pay more for your produce because “real Americans” are entitled to at least a states minimum wage, which I’m sure all liberals are in favor of.
Yet, for some reason, even liberal capitalists pay these illegals 1/2 the minimum wage under the table.
I dont get mad at babies.
Unless they make up straw man arguments
August 11th, 2012 at 12:27 am
Talk about “straw man” arguments, Ronald! Your comment #35 in response to my #34 is so typical, dull and banal, it is hardly worth replying to.
Once again you toss around the term “bigotry”, generally reserved for racial hatred, applying it to my opposition to Liberal-Progressive ideals. I suppose your opposition to “traditional” or “Conservative” views are not bigotry? Who is being dishonest here?
Ronald, you are very much like the Chick-Fil-A bozo-bully who smugly abused an innocent, young woman, posting her image without her consent on You-Tube in a vain attempt to exercise a false superiority. Too bad I cannot give you a free bottle of water because if I could, I would spit in it!
August 11th, 2012 at 5:43 am
Andy, I’ve never mentioned a racist tone (with the exception of your referencing President Obama as other than a member of the human race which you seem to be content with as you seem to stand by that). Perhaps your interpretation of the word bigotry is a product of your own conscience? Patrick however does raise an eyebrow by placing “thugs like Trayvon” with lazy asses and Guantanamo prisoners. I assume he doesn’t know him personally so it appears he’s concluded his own facts.
Opposition to political views is not a form of bigotry or prejudice. This blog isn’t about opposition to Liberal-Progressive ideals but rather to attack anyone that doesn’t kowtow to your mindset as a Liberal which you’ve concluded as all bad with no exception. You even impute opinions of them that you have no way of knowing because you’ve concluded them to be “Liberal”. You’ve even gone as far as to suggest that unless one agrees to your every view in it’s entirety, they’re not real Americans (which I suppose is a step up from certain people that you conclude are not real people).
I challenge you to point to where I have been critical of conservative ideologies. You can’t because I haven’t attacked ideals but rather individual legislation and the ramifications.
I stand by my #35 post as it describes you to a tee. While you are indeed a blind partisan hack, a proven liar on every front, and claim some real man/real American supremacy over anyone that doesn’t agree with your every political beliefs, considering you stand by Patrick’s Trayvon attack and your very own Obama not a man charge, you seem to have a very low tolerance for the black community as well.
August 11th, 2012 at 6:07 am
” I assume he doesn’t know him personally so it appears he’s concluded his own facts.”
Fckin A bro, you’re talking about you’re self and the exact way you treat all righties even when calls for civility are made.
Its right here in all the threads since you arrived.
Want me to pull some of your garbage and expose you’re fckin hypocrisy ?
You’re a fckin piece of work dude, seriously
August 11th, 2012 at 2:32 pm
You see, Ronald, once again you prove my point. Liberal-Progressives have a bad habit of changing the definition of words to suit their agenda. Your use of bigotry here is a prime example.
Just for starters, coming from Detroit, nearly all of my neighbors are Black and we get along just fine. I have Black friends, some even hold a coveted place on my phone’s speed dial. As 80% of all the women locally are Black, I’ve dated a few romantically. ‘Nuff said on that.
It is true that I do hate Socialists. They are truly evil and deserve to be hated. During WW2 in Poland, nearly all of the male members of my family were butchered by German Socialists and later, nearly all of the women relatives were raped and murdered by Russian Socialists. In the end, only one male and three women survived.
Bigotry is properly defined as an irrational hatred, formed by baseless prejudices. There is nothing irrational nor baseless about my personal hatred of Socialists, whom Liberal-Progressives support and aspire to become. So your use of the term is inaccurate and typical of the Progressive agenda to redefine reality, as that is the only way to make the fantasy of Socialism as a positive force true.
August 11th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
Oh, and in regards to Patrick calling Trayvon Martin a thug, Ronald, I suppose you have simply ignored the police reports that Trayvon beat up a bus driver for no apparently good reason and may have been involved in one or more burglaries.